Which is an irrelevant point, because an asteroid can hit Earth tomorrow and end all life on it within days. There are indeed no guarantees of the future.
On the other hand, existing actions most certainly impact future, and to claim otherwise would be to admit to being either severely mentally retarded, or just a dumb agenda pusher. Which considering that you tried to spin this aspect as "guaranteeing the future" is likely what you're doing.
Seriously, yours is a low quality trolling. Up your game.
Russian climate is actually very different as far as primary inhabited regions go. To make the claim you're making is to be utterly ignorant of demographic maps of the region.
Household has to do with Nordic culture. Here honouring your debt is considered your duty, to the point where private bankruptcy is not available. This has little to nothing to do with government.
I have no idea what you mean by "black market participation".
Immigrants, as I note above are an issue of political zeitgeist, which is a completely different topic from how state bureaucracy works.
Carbon tax will become zero if CO2 capture is available, and coal plants are cheaper to operate than CCGTs in situation where natgas is not free.
Current US situation is the exceptional situation where natgas is effectively free. It will not last forever, or likely even a long time, because as distribution network grows, so will demand. For rest of the world, natgas never was and likely never will be free.
On the rest, I literally have family members who work for energy giants who among other things, build various burner plants. Modern coal plant is costly to build, but not costly to maintain. Automated burning processes "just work" after they are installed and tested, all they need is the standard yearly check-up during the normal maintenance cycle. Filtering systems do cause some additional costs, but those are minimal compared to total maintenance costs of the plant.
And outside US, even the current fuel differential cost means that coal is much cheaper to operate per energy generated if you don't penalize it for CO2 emissions.
Solar's efficiency when not rotated to face the sun isn't just about "being on and off with Sun". It's "being wildly inefficient when angle of incoming radiation is significantly less than 90 degrees".
Again, you're arguing from completely divergent cultural base, and attempting to jury rig conclusions. When conclusions in this case concretely show that you are wrong - government is doing the exact opposite of what you suggest it would.
In fact, Nordic model shows that #3 is opposite of truth. The more power government gets here, the less it is abused. For example, here in Finland police can search your house without a warrant for any suspicion of offence for which you can get 6 months in prison or more. It's almost never abused, because police understands that to abuse this would immediately cause backlash among populace.
It's why we have ethics standards for government bureaucrats being higher than for average citizens enshrined in law. They are expected to behave better than citizenry and be punished more harshly for illegal activity because they represent the state to the people.
Doesn't even need to be trans-oceanic. Even continental would likely work, as you could install wind all over the continent. It's going to be windy somewhere.
Gas will be around for a while, because to install intermittent power like solar and not just live with a few hours of power a day and without power the rest of time, as many third world countries work, you have to install spinning reserve. Which is gas, due to CO2 issues. Burning methane literally produces about half of CO2 per unit of produced electric energy compared to coal.
So we go with gas.
And if the CO2 extraction from air ever gets off ground, coal will come back with vengeance. It's cheap, reliable and with modern automated and tightly controlled burn processes clean in all other aspects but CO2 emission rate per unit of energy generated. That is where it's quite awful.
Far more common case is that people who study trees carry pathogens that jump cross tree species. Another point is that studying trees involves invasive procedures like drilling holes in them to make assessments of age, and as any arborist worth his salt will tell you, older trees are very bad at recovering from such shocks than young trees.
You're missing the point by projecting US values on Sweden. There are major differences:
1. Government isn't the enemy of the people, nor is it seen as one. It's overwhelmingly seen as organisation for the people, by the people. This is common in Nordics because here it isn't the government that was the major oppressive force on people. It was the extremely harsh climate. Government was the means to counter this major oppressive force, and actually survive to modernity. 2. Things like tax collection are widely seen primarily as civic duty, not as a burden. That's why we have "omg your tax rate is WHAT?!?!?!" reaction from North Americans migrating here. As well as "your government fully funds WHAT?!?!?!?!" when they have to go to the hospital, take their children to daycare, or take a university class while living on their own.
This however makes the reality of not being able to handle payments while living in the rural areas a reality during things like winter storms, when it's really critical for survival that payment is possible. Reminder of the historic reasons for #1 applies here. So government has noticed that there is a genuine problem in rural areas with cashlessness, and is now acting within its primary mandate of ensuring that backup systems work regardless of how it disadvantages the bureaucracy in Stockholm.
It is how Nordic government works as a matter of principle, and the main reason why most people from other cultures have such massive hurdles comprehending just why many things they're used to "being left to their own devices" "just work" here. It's the way citizenry and state interact with one another in a region where both had to support one another against the primary common enemy that is Nordic winter.
In EU, all remote shopping has legal mandate for a "changed my mind" clause for some time (here it's two weeks). This isn't about vendor. This is about law. Vendor has no ability to compel you to cede this right.
Requirement however is that whatever you return is in original packaging, and vendor can restock is at new. I.e. you could at most take it out of packaging and look at it, or try clothing on as you would in a store. Plugging it in for example is a pattern of usage, at which point this particular clause no longer grants protection.
Note that this is for "changed my mind" and not "product is faulty/not as advertised/broken" issues. Those are handled under different parts of the relevant legislation.
So that's why the news tell us that you millenials are having less sex than pretty much anyone in modern age. You think that having sex means having a "fucking problem".
This is literally a lie packaged to sound reasonable. Most of the plastic that is being rejected is the "dirty plastic". The kind that is effectively impossible to recycle without it costing you an arm and a leg, because you need to do so much separation of crap from actually usable plastic. Which is why it's usually against the agreements to ship it for recycling.
Which was utterly ignored by clear majority of companies shipping it to China.
If you're shipping clean, recyclable plastic, they seem to be still taking it. At least last report I saw on EU exports stated that there are still exports of plastic for recycling going out to China and being received there. Just in much smaller numbers. Which indicates that those few that provide recyclable plastic as they were supposed to are still shipping to China.
Everyone else however is fucked, and that's a clear majority in EU and US. They'll still take your nice clean plastics that can just be melted into reusable plastic. They just don't want Western garbage being sold as "recyclable" in their land fills any more.
>Mr. Norrod describes the challenge AMD has faced over the years and how, for the first time ever, it sees a real shot at making a significant dent in the desktop market.
And then we remember how the first Athlon wiped the table with Pentium 3 and Pentium 4.
That's what people who are afraid of this and actually want the job have been doing for last decade or so. It's actually a good sign of person not really wanting the job if they have "I have higher education that isn't relevant to skills needed on this job" on their CV.
Funnily enough, those "dirty" jobs have the exact opposite problem. They don't want PhDs, because, they will keep looking while working, won't be motivated to work properly and leave the moment when they get another offer.
If you're an employer, you want someone who fits the job, so they'll be motivated to work and stay working for a long time.
And it's those "dirty" jobs that millenial generation just doesn't want to do. Hence the high education in useless field with all the student debt that comes with it, instead of a functional skill set that lets you do said "dirty" job and that would cost you a fraction of college tuition or even free on the job training.
Slashdot Mirror
"Next door neighbour" means absolutely nothing. Different culture, different history, different premise.
False on the face of it. Germany is a great example to the exact contrary.
Which is an irrelevant point, because an asteroid can hit Earth tomorrow and end all life on it within days. There are indeed no guarantees of the future.
On the other hand, existing actions most certainly impact future, and to claim otherwise would be to admit to being either severely mentally retarded, or just a dumb agenda pusher. Which considering that you tried to spin this aspect as "guaranteeing the future" is likely what you're doing.
Seriously, yours is a low quality trolling. Up your game.
Russian climate is actually very different as far as primary inhabited regions go. To make the claim you're making is to be utterly ignorant of demographic maps of the region.
Household has to do with Nordic culture. Here honouring your debt is considered your duty, to the point where private bankruptcy is not available. This has little to nothing to do with government.
I have no idea what you mean by "black market participation".
Immigrants, as I note above are an issue of political zeitgeist, which is a completely different topic from how state bureaucracy works.
Scientists do need to take samples from the tree to establish data for data sets so they can actually do scientific work.
Unfortunately much of such sampling is highly invasive, such as drilling out small parts of the tree.
Carbon tax will become zero if CO2 capture is available, and coal plants are cheaper to operate than CCGTs in situation where natgas is not free.
Current US situation is the exceptional situation where natgas is effectively free. It will not last forever, or likely even a long time, because as distribution network grows, so will demand. For rest of the world, natgas never was and likely never will be free.
On the rest, I literally have family members who work for energy giants who among other things, build various burner plants. Modern coal plant is costly to build, but not costly to maintain. Automated burning processes "just work" after they are installed and tested, all they need is the standard yearly check-up during the normal maintenance cycle. Filtering systems do cause some additional costs, but those are minimal compared to total maintenance costs of the plant.
And outside US, even the current fuel differential cost means that coal is much cheaper to operate per energy generated if you don't penalize it for CO2 emissions.
Baobabs tend to grow far away from any major forested areas. Wikipedia has pretty good images of common habitat of them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Solar's efficiency when not rotated to face the sun isn't just about "being on and off with Sun". It's "being wildly inefficient when angle of incoming radiation is significantly less than 90 degrees".
Again, you're arguing from completely divergent cultural base, and attempting to jury rig conclusions. When conclusions in this case concretely show that you are wrong - government is doing the exact opposite of what you suggest it would.
In fact, Nordic model shows that #3 is opposite of truth. The more power government gets here, the less it is abused. For example, here in Finland police can search your house without a warrant for any suspicion of offence for which you can get 6 months in prison or more. It's almost never abused, because police understands that to abuse this would immediately cause backlash among populace.
It's why we have ethics standards for government bureaucrats being higher than for average citizens enshrined in law. They are expected to behave better than citizenry and be punished more harshly for illegal activity because they represent the state to the people.
Doesn't even need to be trans-oceanic. Even continental would likely work, as you could install wind all over the continent. It's going to be windy somewhere.
Gas will be around for a while, because to install intermittent power like solar and not just live with a few hours of power a day and without power the rest of time, as many third world countries work, you have to install spinning reserve. Which is gas, due to CO2 issues. Burning methane literally produces about half of CO2 per unit of produced electric energy compared to coal.
So we go with gas.
And if the CO2 extraction from air ever gets off ground, coal will come back with vengeance. It's cheap, reliable and with modern automated and tightly controlled burn processes clean in all other aspects but CO2 emission rate per unit of energy generated. That is where it's quite awful.
No, he means omnivore humans.
Far more common case is that people who study trees carry pathogens that jump cross tree species. Another point is that studying trees involves invasive procedures like drilling holes in them to make assessments of age, and as any arborist worth his salt will tell you, older trees are very bad at recovering from such shocks than young trees.
You're speaking of political leanings of the moment.
I'm talking about long term cultural foundation of the bureaucracy.
We're talking about completely different things.
Yes, in Dark Souls modded super hard mode.
Play co-op or die horribly.
This goes to the time of Vikings. You're almost a millenia off.
Spin doctors will spin facts to whatever they want them to show.
I'm merely listing the facts of the matter. I don't really care about spin.
You're missing the point by projecting US values on Sweden. There are major differences:
1. Government isn't the enemy of the people, nor is it seen as one. It's overwhelmingly seen as organisation for the people, by the people. This is common in Nordics because here it isn't the government that was the major oppressive force on people. It was the extremely harsh climate. Government was the means to counter this major oppressive force, and actually survive to modernity.
2. Things like tax collection are widely seen primarily as civic duty, not as a burden. That's why we have "omg your tax rate is WHAT?!?!?!" reaction from North Americans migrating here. As well as "your government fully funds WHAT?!?!?!?!" when they have to go to the hospital, take their children to daycare, or take a university class while living on their own.
This however makes the reality of not being able to handle payments while living in the rural areas a reality during things like winter storms, when it's really critical for survival that payment is possible. Reminder of the historic reasons for #1 applies here. So government has noticed that there is a genuine problem in rural areas with cashlessness, and is now acting within its primary mandate of ensuring that backup systems work regardless of how it disadvantages the bureaucracy in Stockholm.
It is how Nordic government works as a matter of principle, and the main reason why most people from other cultures have such massive hurdles comprehending just why many things they're used to "being left to their own devices" "just work" here. It's the way citizenry and state interact with one another in a region where both had to support one another against the primary common enemy that is Nordic winter.
In EU, all remote shopping has legal mandate for a "changed my mind" clause for some time (here it's two weeks). This isn't about vendor. This is about law. Vendor has no ability to compel you to cede this right.
Requirement however is that whatever you return is in original packaging, and vendor can restock is at new. I.e. you could at most take it out of packaging and look at it, or try clothing on as you would in a store. Plugging it in for example is a pattern of usage, at which point this particular clause no longer grants protection.
Note that this is for "changed my mind" and not "product is faulty/not as advertised/broken" issues. Those are handled under different parts of the relevant legislation.
So that's why the news tell us that you millenials are having less sex than pretty much anyone in modern age. You think that having sex means having a "fucking problem".
This is literally a lie packaged to sound reasonable. Most of the plastic that is being rejected is the "dirty plastic". The kind that is effectively impossible to recycle without it costing you an arm and a leg, because you need to do so much separation of crap from actually usable plastic. Which is why it's usually against the agreements to ship it for recycling.
Which was utterly ignored by clear majority of companies shipping it to China.
If you're shipping clean, recyclable plastic, they seem to be still taking it. At least last report I saw on EU exports stated that there are still exports of plastic for recycling going out to China and being received there. Just in much smaller numbers. Which indicates that those few that provide recyclable plastic as they were supposed to are still shipping to China.
Everyone else however is fucked, and that's a clear majority in EU and US. They'll still take your nice clean plastics that can just be melted into reusable plastic. They just don't want Western garbage being sold as "recyclable" in their land fills any more.
>Mr. Norrod describes the challenge AMD has faced over the years and how, for the first time ever, it sees a real shot at making a significant dent in the desktop market.
And then we remember how the first Athlon wiped the table with Pentium 3 and Pentium 4.
That's what people who are afraid of this and actually want the job have been doing for last decade or so. It's actually a good sign of person not really wanting the job if they have "I have higher education that isn't relevant to skills needed on this job" on their CV.
Funnily enough, those "dirty" jobs have the exact opposite problem. They don't want PhDs, because, they will keep looking while working, won't be motivated to work properly and leave the moment when they get another offer.
If you're an employer, you want someone who fits the job, so they'll be motivated to work and stay working for a long time.
And it's those "dirty" jobs that millenial generation just doesn't want to do. Hence the high education in useless field with all the student debt that comes with it, instead of a functional skill set that lets you do said "dirty" job and that would cost you a fraction of college tuition or even free on the job training.